6 ms·

> Importantly, prices are the same from US to the Africa, despite the fact that revenue generation is vastly different in most developed countries compared to t

> Importantly, prices are the same from US to the Africa, despite the fact that revenue generation is vastly different in most developed countries compared to the others. This can be understood in two ways: 1. Cost of serving is the same from US to Africa (datacenters, network bandwidth, engineering etc), so prices are same 2. If #1 results in less adoption from developing countries, it is okay because they are not the focus anyway (i.e. SV companies are focussed on US/EU markets first). So getting rid of non-revenue making chunk of traffic doesn't hurt much.

supernova87a 8y ago
Yeah, if Google had differential pricing for something that costs them the same to produce, I'm sure you would soon find innovative middlemen who make it their business to source the Maps from lower cost priced countries to higher ones. Just like travel agents or passengers find ways to take cheaper flights from countries or city pairs that airlines price differently to help capture more market, even though it doesn't cost them very different to provide the service.
- matt4077 8y ago
  Any such middlemen would certainly be breaking the terms of their contract with google, and possibly copyright law. If they were willing and able to do so, they could already make a fortune by reselling Google Maps data. Since that does not happen, I have doubts regarding your scenario.
- nickodell 8y ago
  That would be true if the pricing were based on the business's location, but not if the pricing were based on the map's location. If you say that you're in Khartoum when you're actually in New York, you won't get a very useful map back.
ethbro 8y ago
#2 seems shortsighted as a business model. Where your unit cost for a product is essentially negligible (amortized against other GM customers and GCP scale infrastructure), why would you decrease exposure in a potential growth market? The business answer is "because offering discounts cannibalizes revenue from higher-margin markets." But in this case... you literally know exactly where the user is located.
- RestlessMind 8y ago
  > why would you decrease exposure in a potential growth market? But is exposure really reduced? Google already has a free quota which is enough to bring plenty of exposure.

supernova87a 8y ago

Yeah, if Google had differential pricing for something that costs them the same to produce, I'm sure you would soon find innovative middlemen who make it their business to source the Maps from lower cost priced countries to higher ones. Just like travel agents or passengers find ways to take cheaper flights from countries or city pairs that airlines price differently to help capture more market, even though it doesn't cost them very different to provide the service.

matt4077 8y ago
Any such middlemen would certainly be breaking the terms of their contract with google, and possibly copyright law. If they were willing and able to do so, they could already make a fortune by reselling Google Maps data. Since that does not happen, I have doubts regarding your scenario.
nickodell 8y ago
That would be true if the pricing were based on the business's location, but not if the pricing were based on the map's location. If you say that you're in Khartoum when you're actually in New York, you won't get a very useful map back.

ethbro 8y ago

#2 seems shortsighted as a business model. Where your unit cost for a product is essentially negligible (amortized against other GM customers and GCP scale infrastructure), why would you decrease exposure in a potential growth market? The business answer is "because offering discounts cannibalizes revenue from higher-margin markets." But in this case... you literally know exactly where the user is located.

RestlessMind 8y ago
> why would you decrease exposure in a potential growth market? But is exposure really reduced? Google already has a free quota which is enough to bring plenty of exposure.